I just checked my CR and noticed a negative mark from mail-order catalog company for $70. I've never ordered anything from them! After calling them, I found out that they have my old address (of 8 years ago) in their records and that's where they sent what ever it is that they think I bought from them. This is my parents' present address. So one of them used my information to order from this company. I want to dispute the charge and get the item off my CR, but I don't want to get my parents in trouble for credit fraud and identity theft. What should I do?
Did your parents in fact order anything, and did they do it in your name, or in their name? They might have ordered something themselves, but the company might have used your account instead of setting up one for them, since the address, part of the name, and a phone number might match your old account. They might also have not ordered anything, and the company messed up some other customer's order, and is billing and shipping to you. If your parents are actually ordering things in your name, you need to stop it, regardless of how you deal with this case. Ask them.
Before you fit the parents for their orange jumpsuits I would suggest that A) they likely did nothing wrong and B) this is JUST the kind of mix-up that creditors swear "can't happen" but does. My guess is that OC (original Creditor), CRA (Credit Reporting Agency) or CA (Collection Agent) got it wrong in reporting you, instead of ma and pa; or that Ma and Pa did order using their own identities and again, in the vagaries of the beautiful credit reporting system we have (not) - the OC or CRA has screwed it up. My spouse is a "Jr." so I know of what I speak. Simply dispute for validation (not verification) as not yours - demand to see proof that "you" ordered and be done with it. Remember, it isn't YOUR job to provide them with who did order/owe, but simply to prove it's not you.
I've never ordered from them. The Co. is named something like "Toehut." As I said, I haven't lived at home for over 8 years and this is a recent bill.
if your name is anything similar to your 'rents, and/or their address is still on your credit report, it can show up on your credit report. This is one of the reasons to get any ancient address deleted from your file, as soon as you can, on some CRA's that's easier than on others.
New members read this http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=410243#post410243 Never read the fine print. There ain't no way you're going to like it.
NEW MEMBERS READ THIS. http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=410243#post410243 1* Simply dispute for validation (not verification) as not yours - demand to see proof that "you" ordered and be done with it. 2* it isn't YOUR job to provide them with who did order/owe, but simply to prove it's not you. kseab ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1*Right on. 2*It's it's not his obligation to prove it's not him either. It's their responsibility to prove it was him. Never read the fine print. There ain't no way you're going to like it.
Good point! It really isn't your job to prove you didn't - it's their job to prove you did. Anyway, what catalog company sends COD anymore? They must think this is on a "toehut" credit card or account? Or they think there was a bad check? Whatever. Obviously it's not yours. You don't care. This is annoying I'm sure but it sounds (knock wood) like it will be fairly easy to make them realize they are mistaken. Good luck!
Ah....I think you mean Fingerhut and is the CA RJM Aquisitions? I have the same thing on my TU CR and it WAS on my EX. I disputed with EX as not mine since I had no idea what this charge for $56 was and it came back verified. I was incredulous...yet it dropped off and disappeared from my CR soon after. From what I read the CA trying to pull this stuff for Fingerhut is a bunch of shysters and they have no leg to stand on since they can't prove jack.
Not sure if you are talking to me or not ontrack, but I looked through old CRs and I don't see that they did (if we are talking about RJM also).
